Re: [PATCH 2/2] Move sequencer to builtin
- From
Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 9, 2013, 19:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALkWK0kX1E9A9q1ptfx-QA1LiBf4UEeHF92xR21am=vv_zKZZA@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <87zjuz84tp.fsf@hexa.v.cablecom.net>
Thomas Rast wrote:
> The arguments arise to a large degree from attempting to review his > work. Not doing so is not an option, see e.g.:
I don't recall saying that you shouldn't review his work (?). What I _am_ saying is that there is absolutely no point belaboring over what's wrong with Felipe's "tone", "demeanour" and "style of discussion". It has been discussed a zillion times now. You're doing it under the pretext of "agreement" and "setting a good example" (in jk's words); in reality, you're setting a bad example by showing everyone that it is okay to do the same thing (welcome jh!) and waste everyone's time.
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/223279 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/225969 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/226125
All these are legitimate reviews, and they and everyone's getting along just fine. What argument are you talking about? *scratches head*
> And that's not even counting the part of the argument that arises purely > from deliberate flaunting of the project's guidelines.
What guidelines?